Well, I usually do none of those things, but I still suck

Playing defensively is much more fun to me, but I usually can't do it because RTS games really punish you for trying it. I really wish that this were not the case. If game developers made towers/walls stronger, strategy games would be less mass the correct unit and attack and more strategic.

Its true that most RTS strategies, on stratagems, are blazing cluster fests of fury.

I do indeed like this sometimes, although not for a full 2 hours or so (usually). Personally I like to separate economy from military, so when the two are essentially the same (like in most all RTS) ... while it can be a lot of fun, at the same time I feel that I would like to have 100% of my time devoted to the military. I suppose this is why I was able to get into Dawn of War 2 even though I personally loved fighting with huge armes (and Dawn of War 2 only had you fighting with a handful of soldiers).

Also, I must say, I never enjoyed Warcraft 3 from a competitive perspective , except for limited Demo-rush play with my friends.

The only RTS I ever really liked were Starcraft and Dawn of War (original + expansions). Sure I played others including Command and Conquer: Red Alert, and Empire Earth ... yet I couldn't really "get into" the game as much as with SC and DAW.

I really liked the Imperial Guard for Dawn of War ... that was probably, for me, the most interesting faction to play in the series ... while it always "seemed" that Orcs and Eldar were underpowered in comparison.

Actually, it almost felt as if Orcs were built to kill the Guard, the Guard were built to kill the Marines, and the Marines were built to kill the Orcs ... and everyone could defeat the Eldar. Although the Orcs nonetheless seemed weaker overall than even the Imperial Guard.

I loved playing as the Space Marines, Imperial Guard, Necrons, and Tau ... but Orc and Eldar never really called to me

In any event, while severe micro is NICE ... I prefer it in games with lots of units (like StarCraft, but more closely like Dawn of War .... and Rome Total War) while games where your entire investment is just ONE dude walking on the map (not including heroes) its kind of lame to me, as well as seeming more like a bar fight and less like an epic war, which is why I guess I never got that into WarCraft.

We need to find one of these games, quick!

Lol, it's not like you ever played with me anyway.

Heh ... the difference between 30 minutes and 1-2 hours is just a matter of map size and player count.

  The  RTS game I remember that allowed for good tower defense strategies was Age of Empires.  I remember one game on a large map with 4-5 players in it.  I sent my worker to some edge of screen area(the map had lots of trees in it).  I would send out an occasional troop just to let pps know I was there but I lined my 1 way in route with lots of towers and a few troops.  Build the wonder.  Then they came after me en mass.  I was able to complete my wonder an win the game .  It was too difficult for them to get threw maybe 20-30 towers? Catapults, trebuchets, cavalry, mangonels, scorpions, battering rams, infantry could not finish me off fast enough.  They coordinated their attacks also.  Even having the catapults mow threw the forest.  Don't remember which civ I was using.

  Beside AoE's, I also enjoyed Warcraft, Total Annhiliation, Starcraft and now I play CoH's.  Probably forgot a couple.  C n C nvr really grabbed me.  Thought it was ok in beginning.  I have yet to play Supreme Commander or Sins of a Solar Empire.

  The main reason people don't do well(that I used to see) was because they didn't use the hot keys to que up units.  Or properly us waypoints. Also people have a tough time at micromanagement of individual or group units(again hot keys important).

  When my connection is decent enough I will probably get SoaSE.  Not that good of an rts player anymore.  When I can I'll join you all in a game of that.

I am no rts  noob according to that article. Usually my approach to rts games is a good offense is also a good defense.

I play n00bishly. Mainly because I play exclusively SP and enjoy the "creation" aspect of the game as much as the battles. Building bases, teching up, and a slow systematic expansion is fun for me. Of course, if I were to ever MP it I would have to totally change all that .

Heh, I like that site. Used to frequent it daily until August last year when an arrogant elitist got me fed up with that place. There are too many arrogant guys over there.

AGM knows what he's talking about. He truly understands RTS. I can tell that from reading his posts since 2005 or so when I joined the place.

But just like a professor who's an absolute expert in a certain field, he's elitist and maybe a bit arrogant.

Those demonstrationsigns are hilariously though

Dawn of War

Excluding Soulstorm and Necrons, the general consencus online was that Orks and Eldar were slightly better then the others.

Orks made harassment useless with their shooting buildings and the Shoota Boyz had no setuptime for their Big Shootas.

Eldar is quite unique in that they're the only race in an RTS game who were either too weak or too strong.

In inexperienced players hands that couldn't utilize Fleet of Foot well, they lost to every other race if the opponent was around the same skilllvl.

In a great players hands however, the Eldar ruled the battlefield with Fleet of Foot. That ability allowed the Eldar to decide if he wanted to fight a battle or retreat unharmed.

In Dark Crusade however, the Eldar domination was stopped cold. Like running into a wall of spikes!

Tau outshoot them and Necrons walk right through them.

Tasunke

You played online some?